Young woman who was shot in head at Lealman church dies
By Kameel Stanley and Dan Sullivan, Times Staff Writers
In Print: Sunday, February 19, 2012
ST. PETERSBURG — Hannah Kelley always saved a hug for her dad after he finished preaching the Sunday morning message at Grace Connection Church.
He always made sure to kiss the top of her head. Father and daughter went through the ritual last Sunday, just like they always did.
--------------
They said Hannah Kelley's fiance, Dustin Bueller, was in a church closet with friend John Penu as Moises Zambrana, 48, showed them his Ruger 9mm. Bueller, who turns 21 this month, had expressed interest in buying a weapon for his birthday, according to sheriff's officials.
Zambrana had removed the gun's magazine, but forgot there was a round still in the chamber. The gun went off and a bullet tore through a wall into the next room, where it hit Kelley in the head.
More: http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/young-woman-shot-in-head-at-st-petersburg-church-dies/1216059
= new reply since forum marked as read
This is a life saving device
This is a life taking device
when some machete-waving pirate decides to steal your boat and use you for fish bait? 
Plug those two items into your post above, and see what it does to your word-gaming.
(But I'm sure you're right: harsh salty words and a sternly pointed finger would certainly be the best of all possible options. Unless, of course, a squirt bottle of vinegar was handy or a bicycle wheel... :rofl
Oh, let's not get into that again...
...have a higher chance of becoming violent criminals. Spousal abusers, child abusers, muggers, rapists, robbers, drug dealers, drug abusers, carjackers, gay-bashers, or whatever.
Regardless, all groups of people, every socio-economic combination you can think of, has in it spouse abusers, child abusers, muggers, rapists, robbers, etc. So, no, I don't belong to some elite group that has a zero rate of criminal production. Which is why we need equal justice and fair trials when people are arrested for crimes.
But at no point did I explicitly or implicitly say that "those people" should just be tossed in prison or in a mass grave or ethnically cleansed or whatever.
If a robber or rapist or domestic abuser or home invader gets on the wrong end of their intended victim's weapon, then so be it. Regardless of socio-economic status. It's shitty for everybody involved, but it's the least-shitty outcome in a situation that has deteriorated to that particular point. And remember, when a violent criminal dies, all potential for future crime dies with him. So, of course, does all potential good. But let's face it, if they're at the point where they're wielding weapons to hurt and maim and steal and threaten, the overall future badness will far outweigh the future over goodness.
But that's why, ideally, they'd be jailed and given counseling in prison. That's their chance to turn their life around, to change course, to get help. And some of them will.
Unfortunately, prison is now a part of doing business, a rite of passage, a networking opportunity, an education experience. 
[div class="excerpt" style=background:#AFEEEE]I think we should concentrate more on what society can do to discourage the evolution of such people, rather than writing them off as being "so down on the bell curve that they're essentially pure evil". We're better than that. Maybe you had a bad day, but I still think you're OK. I didn't make a Hitler reference, either obliquely or acutely, but when we have thoughts like that, which are tempting at times, we embark on a slippery slope.
I do, too. Regardless of how the bell curve is shaped, though, there will always be the worst of the worst. I think we need to seriously reform our drug laws; I think we need to seriously reform the prison system; I think we need to seriously address the prosperity gap (the gini index); I think we need universal single-payer health insurance that includes mental-health services; I think we need free tuition to state 4-year universities for scientists and engineers and doctors and nurses; I think we need free tuition to state 2-year colleges for all specialties; I think we need to get of the WTO and NAFTA; I think we need to break up the corporate vertically-integrated monopolies; I think we need to reinstate sane tariffs to bring jobs back to America and gut our economic and military rivals; I think we need to repeal Taft-Hartley; I think we need a stock-transaction tax.
I think we need to do a lot of things to make like in America better, so we have more people producing and fewer people preying. So our families can have the single-income middle class lifestyle for a good chunk of the population.
Our incarceration rate is 500 per 100,000 people; these measures would probably drop that number by 80% in a generation. But in the end, there will still be that 100/100k in jail, a good portion of which will fall in the "pure evil" or "irredeemable" catagory. And whether it's arrested, tried, and convicted, or shot dead by a homeowner, we're better off without them in society.
I do care which way they are removed, but I'm not interested in disarming people or putting people who have been forced to defend themselves with deadly force through the legal wringer to pursue a policy of "only through the legal system".
I prefer arrest over lethal force, and that will be the predominate method that the human predators will be removed from society. But it won't be the only method. And I'm not going to equate legitimate self-defense with "summary executions".
Hunting usually involves killing. Target shooting is practice for killing. Guns are designed for collecting about as often as memorial coins are made for collecting.
Yup, that takes the prize for the most inane comment ever on DU. Congratulations! I love the harvest bit.
...a free pass for killing an attacker that he has already subdued and disarmed. 
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117217038#post13
...you and I made the same point at the same time! 
Believe it or not, most police officers do not carry guns at all times (although they may call upon armed officers):
In the United Kingdom, the majority of police officers do not carry firearms, except in special circumstances. This originates from the formation of the Metropolitan Police Service in the 19th century, when police were not armed, partly to counter public fears and objections concerning armed enforcers as this had been previously seen due to the British Army maintaining order when needed. The arming of police in the United Kingdom is a perennial topic of debate.
Most officers are instead issued with other items for personal defence, such as Speedcuffs, Extendable "ASP" Baton, and incapacitant sprays such as PAVA or CS spray. While not a firearm, CS spray is subject to some of the same rules and regulations as a projectile firing firearm under Section 5 (b) of the Firearms Act 1968.[1]
The Ministry of Defence Police, Civil Nuclear Constabulary and Police Service of Northern Ireland (formerly the Royal Ulster Constabulary) are issued firearms as a matter of routine. Every force can also call upon the Force Firearms Units, Armed Response Vehicle, and certain specialist units of the Metropolitan Police are routinely armed.
In the year 2007-08, there were 6,780 Authorised Firearms Officers, 21,181 police operations in which firearms were authorised throughout England and Wales and 7 incidents where conventional firearms were used.[2]
Since 2004, Police forces have increasingly been deploying Tasers, for use against armed assailants, by Authorised Firearms Officers. Tasers are considered by the authorities to be a less lethal alternative to firearms, although Amnesty International links their use to 70 deaths in the US and Canada.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_use_of_firearms_in_the_United_Kingdom
And Britain hasn't fallen into total shit and disarray, and I would note they of course have a lower homicide rate. In fact, roughly one-quarter of our homicide rate despite having significant poverty rates! Shocking, to think that some law enforcement officers believe they can save lives without guns!
...that's a distortion of my words, but then again, that same poster who is claiming that is that what I'm saying and not that it is conditioning sanctions extrajudicial murder so I'm cool with it
noun \ˈmi-lə-tə-ˌri-zəm\
Definition of MILITARISM
1
a : predominance of the military class or its ideals b : exaltation of military virtues and ideals
2
: a policy of aggressive military preparedness
...but I'm also of the opinion that my understanding of such arguments is teleological in that I believe that weapons would not exist if man did not desire their creation and use to a certain end. Our ability to reason outside of this box, to understand why we take pleasure in certain things and not in others, to think about the causes we take up as our own and put into effect, constitute a form of judgment that one must morally account for within the soul. When we take pleasure in seeing clay pigeons blasted apart, or bullets put onto target, we can only do so with the knowledge that this pleasure taking only occurs within the context of wide misuse of such objects, not as tools of construction, but as weapons of destruction. When we commit ourselves to taking pleasure in such pursuits, we are naturally abandoning others as not of importance. These basic choices pervade our society and it is up to our reasoning ability to judge which is beautiful to our own soul and why we take pleasure in them rather than in other pursuits at that particular moment in time.
He states:
"It always remains a scandal of philosophy and universal human reason that the existence of things outside us ... should have to be assumed merely on faith, and that if it occurs to anyone to doubt it, we should be unable to answer him with a satisfactory proof."[3]
Kant proposed a ‘Copernican Revolution’ in reverse, saying that:
"Up to now it has been assumed that all our cognition must conform to the objects; but ... let us once try whether we do not get farther with the problems of metaphysics by assuming that the objects must conform to our cognition."[4]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanual_Kant
Would you care to explain how the one's that do not are not simulating combat or hunting?
Benchrest Rifle
Bullseye pistol
Cowboy long-range precision rifle
ISSF 50m Pistol
...to name just a few. None of those have anything to do with combat or hunting, just the extreme limit of precison, accuracy, or both.
Like shoot fish in a barrel when the other side isn't well educated on the subject matter...
...50m pistol = snipers to you? You need to lay off the video games...
Let me know when you see snipers packing one of these to the field...
[img]
[/img]
Clueless. Absolutely. Completely. 
That wasn't the argument - the claim was simulation. Would you claim that this is a commonly used weapon?
...precisely nothing to do with any form of sniping. I would only claim you don't know what you are talking about here. And you are doing a fine job of supporting that claim...
Why would you present it as an either/or?
...made ex post facto to justify the pollution of our society with an excessive amount of weaponry. Have faith friend, we can change the dialectic!
"I firmly believe that police, with the exception of those in military dictatorships, approach every situation with the desire that no loss of life, whether of victim or assailant, shall occur."
You're forgetting a lot of ugly history in this country...
I think it's a mixed bag.
Do you have knowledge of cops that are out to kill? Death squads? That was the topic: cops who intend to cause loss of life. If you have any such knowledge, contact your District Attorney. Then change your address and apply for a concealed carry permit. 
Hundreds of rounds fired, people all around, nobody suffered so much as a flesh wound. Well, my thumb got a little bruised from loading magazines.
